November 19, 2024 • 18 mins
This episode explores the development and significance of the new AASHTO R 119 standard, officially titled “Standard Practice for Grinding the Ends of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens.”
Brian shares his firsthand experience in creating this standard, highlighting the collaborative efforts with various state DOTs and the importance of standardizing concrete practices. Listeners will learn why AASHTO R 119 is crucial for those working with ultra-high-performance concrete (UHPC) and how it addresses the limitations of traditional capping methods.
The episode also looks at the broader implications of AASHTO R 119, including its potential integration into other key standards like AASHTO T 24, ASTM C31, and ASTM C39. We also discuss how AASHTO R 119 moved from a provisional to a full standard and the ongoing efforts to promote its adoption across the industry.
Have questions, comments, or want to be a guest on an upcoming episode? Email podcast@aashtoresource.org.
Related information on this and other episodes can be found at aashtoresource.org.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Kim Swanson (00:03):
Welcome to AASHTO Resource Q&A.
We're taking time to discussconstruction materials, testing
and inspection with people inthe know.
From exploring testing problemsand solutions to laboratory
best practices and qualitymanagement, we're covering
topics important to you.
Brian Johnson (00:19):
Welcome to AASHTO Resource Q&A.
I'm Brian Johnson.
Kim Swanson (00:22):
And I'm Kim Swanson , and welcome to another episode
of AASHTO Resource Q&A.
I'm Brian Johnson and I'm KimSwanson, and welcome to another
episode of AASHTO Resource Q&A.
What are we here to talk abouttoday, brian?
Brian Johnson (00:31):
Today we're going to talk about a development in
concrete standards that I don'tknow, that everybody is aware of
, and this may take us on a bitof a sidetrack conversation to
standards development.
So, we'll see this is going tobe really short or way too long,
(00:55):
but you'll be able to tell byhow much time is on the episode,
so don't worry.
What I want to talk about isthis new full standard.
The standard designation isAASHTO R119.
119.
And it's a 2024 date on thatone.
(01:17):
It is the standard practice forgrinding the ends of
cylindrical concrete specimens.
Are you with me?
Kim Swanson (01:25):
I am.
I am with you.
I'm confused that it's an Rdesignation, though.
But why am I confused?
I feel like that's not normal.
Am I just not rememberingthings correctly?
Because that's also apossibility.
Brian Johnson (01:36):
Well, Rs and AASHTO are standard practices.
So, those are things that youdo that do not produce a test
result.
Kim Swanson (01:44):
Gotcha.
That's why I was thinking.
Brian Johnson (01:47):
Okay, yeah, so this is a practice for grinding
the ends of the cylinders andthe reason why this standard
exists is because we created it.
So this is a case where I can'ttake full credit because there
were others involved, but thiswas my standard that I worked on
because I saw a need there.
(02:08):
You remember our episode onUHPC?
Yes, Ultra high performanceconcrete.
With ultra high performanceconcrete, you pretty much have
to grind the ends of thecylinders plain to 0.002 inches
(02:29):
before you test them forcompressive strength.
For regular concrete cylinders,you often will use sulfur or
gypsum capping or pad caps, butthose materials aren't strong
enough for ultra highperformance concrete, so you use
a uh end grinder.
(02:51):
Now, these end grinders are notthe same as what a lot of
people try to use for typicalcylinder uh grinding, which
would be like a handheld grinderor a uh, just a kind of regular
like uh what saw you'd get athome depot or something like
that or some other uh placewhere you'd buy something like
(03:14):
that uh.
So I thought it was good tohave a standard so that we could
standardize the process andthen ultimately make that an
option for people in standardslike uh, AASHTO, t24 and ASTM,
(03:34):
c31, uh and c39 AS ASHTO r39 r39and R100.
So for those of you and C1856,which that's the UHPC standard.
So the idea is that this iskind of like.
This needs to get woven intothe fabric of all of these
(03:56):
standards, in my opinion, sothat it is a regular option.
So what I did is originally thiswas published as a provisional
standard in AASHTO.
In the provisional processes ithas to get renewed every two
years or voted on to go to afull standard.
Thankfully, there were some ofthe members of AASHTO and some
(04:22):
of the DOTs I believe Floridaand Texas helped out with this
more than most because they usethe UHPC materials at times and
they contributed to it.
So that's why I can't claimfull ownership of this standard.
So what makes an AASHTOstandard An AASHTO standard is
consensus from the DOT.
(04:42):
So those members helped out,made some really good revisions
that made my rough standard amuch better standard, as the
consensus process does.
And now what we have is thisfull standard that can be used
for accreditation purposes andreferenced by other standards.
So what I did at that point nowthat this is live, I'm trying to
(05:05):
lobby the other committees andsubcommittees to consider adding
it.
So reached out to the variousAASHTO technical subcommittees
and main committee and the ASTMsubcommittees and main committee
to get this added.
And one other standard that Ireally want to get this added to
is ASTM C1077, because rightnow it allows for capping use of
(05:32):
pad caps and that's it.
But sometimes if somebody isused to working with UHPC all
the time and they say I justwant to grind all the ends and
be done with it, they would havean option to do that for
certification purposes of theirtechnicians and for a required
test method to be included intheir scope of services.
(05:54):
So a lot there withaccreditation certification
standard use.
But I want to make people awarethat R119 is out there.
I know we have people overseasthat listen to this at times and
they may not know about thedevelopment of this.
So I hope you check thisstandard out.
(06:14):
It would be in the 2024standards volume for AASHTO
standards volume for AASHTO andit would also be available
anywhere you get standards likeASTM, Compass or IHS, they
should have that as well.
I know Compass does.
I don't know about IHS, but Iassume at this point they would
have it.
(06:34):
Anyway, that's my publicservice announcement slash
promotional message about R119.
Kim Swanson (06:42):
So is there a ASTM equivalent to this, or is it
just only an AASHTO standard?
Brian Johnson (06:47):
Of course you would ask that question.
No, there is not an ASTMequivalent to that.
The current agreement betweenASTM and AASHTO is that if there
is a new standard developed inone, the other standard
development organization willnot develop a the same standard
(07:07):
in the other one.
Uh, now, as an AASHTO employee,I probably should have taken it
to AASHTO first, but I didn't.
Uh, actually did talk to ASTMin a committee meeting, cause I
was in a committee meeting whenthis uh, before I fully
developed this thing, I said,hey, are you interested in this?
(07:28):
Because I think it would makesense to refer to this, and I
can't remember whichsubcommittee meeting I was in.
But there was no interest indeveloping such a standard in
ASTM.
So I then took it to AASHTO andthat subcommittee was
interested in that.
So that's where it resides.
(07:49):
So there was a discussion.
I think if both of them wereinterested, I probably would
have talked to both of theorganization's decision-making
people who can have a say in thestandard and say I think this
is good for both of them.
So it would be nice to have atruly joint standard that could
(08:11):
get balloted to both at the sametime and have that be like the
guinea pig for trying that kindof balloting, because I really
do.
When it comes to the jointstandards, it's never really
been a joint standard, even ifyou see AASHTO and ASDM on the
same one.
What would be truly a jointstandard would be one where the
(08:33):
memberships of both committeesare voting on the same changes
to the same standard and areapproving this exact same one,
but they don't really.
It doesn't work that way.
I hope that one day it will.
It would take a lot of effortand a lot of okay, I don't know
(08:55):
how to say this, but in a waythat people understand.
But sometimes there are theprocesses at the end of the line
will dictate what happens atthe beginning.
We call that the tail waggingthe dog in our country, but
(09:17):
there's probably a phrase forthat in other places as well.
But I think that one of thereasons why we we would struggle
to to do that is because themeetings are held at different
times.
So that's not a great reasonfrom a process perspective to
say like we can't.
We can't do this because ofthis arbitrarily at one point,
(09:45):
arbitrarily selected date formeeting, uh, for these, these
activities, uh.
But I think that is that is notthe only roadblock in this
process, but it would certainlybe one of them and so just I
want to recap, of making sure Iunderstand this is that the
(10:06):
ashto r119 right?
Kim Swanson (10:09):
is that the right?
Did I say that right?
Okay, r119 you're trying to getnow that it's a real, real live
standard, it's an officialstandard um, you're trying to
get that referenced in otherstandards applicable standards
of saying, instead of their own.
This is how you do it, justlike.
(10:29):
Do it like AASHTO R119.
Yeah, that's right.
Brian Johnson (10:36):
And that's kind of the way it goes for practices
they really only have value ifthey're used in standard test
methods and other standards aswell, and otherwise it just kind
of hangs out there as apractice that nobody's requiring
.
And uh, and I'm not saying theyhave to require it, um, but I
think it at the beginning, ifpeople aren't really sure about
(10:57):
it, they could at least have anote or something that says you
can also, or or you may,consider using this standard, uh
, for certain circumstances, youknow, whatever however, they
want to define it if they wantto go light at first, because
this, you know, these things cantake some time and and I'm not
(11:19):
saying the standard is perfect,I mean it's.
It's probably like no standardis perfect, so it it's going to
have revisions, but I think justgetting it out there and
getting more people using it isthe way to improve it.
So, uh, we want to make thathappen and and I hope people
will start checking it out.
Kim Swanson (11:38):
So how often will it be revised Like?
How often?
Like you said, no standardsperfect.
So how often will people belooking at this at AASHTO,
making sure that it is stillrelevant and useful?
Brian Johnson (11:52):
Well, because it's a full standard now it'll
go into the normal routine of ithas to be updated every so many
years and I should be able torattle that off, but I can't
remember.
If it's eight years, like inASTM, it's eight years, it might
be less in AASHTO it might besix, but I just can't remember
(12:13):
right now.
Kim Swanson (12:14):
But it could be sooner if someone found a need
and wanted to ballot changes.
Brian Johnson (12:18):
Oh yeah, as needed always applies in
standards, except well, in ASTMand AASHTO, at least, like some
standards, they don't want to doit too often because it's too
disruptive, like I would say.
Like R18 is a good example of astandard that you don't want to
update all the time becausethere are all these systems that
(12:39):
are kind of tied to how thatdocument is laid out.
So you don't want to constantlydisrupt people unless it's
important.
So we had some small changestake place, but the big ballot
is going to be coming out heresoon.
But again, standardsdevelopment can be a slow
process, so I don't, even ifeverything goes well with that
(13:03):
one, it'll be two years beforepeople see those changes in
reality.
Kim Swanson (13:07):
All right, and is AASHTO R119 available for the
AASHTO accreditation programs?
Can laboratories be accreditedfor that starting now or not?
Brian Johnson (13:17):
yet?
Yeah, it's available forinclusion in the AASHTO
accreditation program.
For inclusion in the AASHTOaccreditation program, all they
have to do is request to have itincluded in the CCRL inspection
and they can add it to theirprogram and start accrediting
for it.
And we can start accreditingfor it, but nobody's going to
want it until it's required orreferred to and some of the
(13:42):
other standards that they arerequired to be accredited for.
Kim Swanson (13:46):
That makes sense.
So anything else about this,because I feel like we are right
on the cusp of this being itsown episode.
We were going back and forth,so is there anything else that
you want to talk about this andthen we can wrap up this
discussion.
Brian Johnson (14:00):
I don't think there's anything else to throw
in here.
I mainly want just people to beaware of this standard.
We can make this a mini episode.
I think that probably is fine,because we've dragged this
conversation out longer than Ihad expected, which this happens
.
Kim Swanson (14:21):
It definitely does.
Brian Johnson (14:23):
I often will go on too long about something.
I hope I didn't, though I hopethat there was some useful
information here for people,even though I feel like I may
have gone on too long.
Kim Swanson (14:33):
Well, I hope we didn't go on too long and that
our listeners are stilllistening, but I did want to put
a plug in.
We are gearing up for the 2025AASHTO Resource Technical
Exchange, as at the time of thisrecording, it will be March
17th through the 20th inBellevue, washington, again in
2025.
(14:54):
So if you've never been to atechnical exchange or you may
hear us refer to it as TechX ifyou've never attended, this is a
great opportunity for you toget involved and expand your
network and really exploretopics that really help you
improve your professional life.
Brian Johnson (15:17):
I'm going to say I'm going to say that's a thing
I would agree.
(15:37):
I would agree, I would agree, Iwould agree.
I think one of the advantagesof technical exchange is all the
people thatcontractors that youend up using for testing.
All sorts of opportunitiesawait when you attend TechX.
Kim Swanson (15:56):
Yes, and you can find out more information about
resourceorg TechEx ataashtoresource.
org/ events.
Well, thanks for taking time todiscuss AASHTO R119 today,
Brian.
Brian Johnson (16:10):
I am very happy to do it.
As I said, I wanted to get theword out about this standard, so
hopefully we were successful.
Kim Swanson (16:19):
And if you have questions about the standard,
you can reach out to Brian orcatch him at TechX, because I'm
sure he will be there.
Brian Johnson (16:27):
I will be there and I'm also going to be on the
mid-year meetings for the compmeetings, talking about this at
the relevant ones, and I'm goingto be at the ASTM meeting in
December in Orlando also pushingthis standard.
And I guess I should mention Iam pushing this standard but not
because I I don't like, standto gain anything by this, other
(16:52):
than the fact that I think itwould be really useful for
people uh, to have it, and otherthan this recording, and people
who have worked on this with methey'll have no idea that I had
anything to do with it, andthat's totally fine.
I almost didn't even mention myinvolvement in it, but you
might be wondering, like, why Icare so much about it is because
I put a lot of effort into it.
(17:13):
Anyway, that's my soft salespitch, I guess, on that, I'm not
, there's a reason Was it soft?
Well, there's a reason that I'mnot in business.
I would be a horrible businessperson.
Kim Swanson (17:28):
I'm going to not comment on that, but thanks for
joining us and see you next time.
Brian Johnson (17:37):
All right.
Kim Swanson (17:41):
Sounds good.
Thanks for listening to AASHTOResource Q&A.
If you'd like to be a guest orjust submit a question, send us
an email at podcast ataashtoresourceorg, or call Brian
at 240-436-4820.
For other news and relatedcontent, check out AASHTO
Resources social media accountsor go to aashtoresourceorg.
Welcome to AASHTO Resource Q&A.
We're taking time to discussconstruction materials, testing
and inspection with people inthe know.
From exploring testing problemsand solutions to laboratory
best practices and qualitymanagement, we're covering
topics important to you.
Brian Johnson (00:19):
Welcome to AASHTO Resource Q&A.
I'm Brian Johnson.
Kim Swanson (00:22):
And I'm Kim Swanson , and welcome to another episode
of AASHTO Resource Q&A.
I'm Brian Johnson and I'm KimSwanson, and welcome to another
episode of AASHTO Resource Q&A.
What are we here to talk abouttoday, brian?
Brian Johnson (00:31):
Today we're going to talk about a development in
concrete standards that I don'tknow, that everybody is aware of
, and this may take us on a bitof a sidetrack conversation to
standards development.
So, we'll see this is going tobe really short or way too long,
(00:55):
but you'll be able to tell byhow much time is on the episode,
so don't worry.
What I want to talk about isthis new full standard.
The standard designation isAASHTO R119.
119.
And it's a 2024 date on thatone.
(01:17):
It is the standard practice forgrinding the ends of
cylindrical concrete specimens.
Are you with me?
Kim Swanson (01:25):
I am.
I am with you.
I'm confused that it's an Rdesignation, though.
But why am I confused?
I feel like that's not normal.
Am I just not rememberingthings correctly?
Because that's also apossibility.
Brian Johnson (01:36):
Well, Rs and AASHTO are standard practices.
So, those are things that youdo that do not produce a test
result.
Kim Swanson (01:44):
Gotcha.
That's why I was thinking.
Brian Johnson (01:47):
Okay, yeah, so this is a practice for grinding
the ends of the cylinders andthe reason why this standard
exists is because we created it.
So this is a case where I can'ttake full credit because there
were others involved, but thiswas my standard that I worked on
because I saw a need there.
(02:08):
You remember our episode onUHPC?
Yes, Ultra high performanceconcrete.
With ultra high performanceconcrete, you pretty much have
to grind the ends of thecylinders plain to 0.002 inches
(02:29):
before you test them forcompressive strength.
For regular concrete cylinders,you often will use sulfur or
gypsum capping or pad caps, butthose materials aren't strong
enough for ultra highperformance concrete, so you use
a uh end grinder.
(02:51):
Now, these end grinders are notthe same as what a lot of
people try to use for typicalcylinder uh grinding, which
would be like a handheld grinderor a uh, just a kind of regular
like uh what saw you'd get athome depot or something like
that or some other uh placewhere you'd buy something like
(03:14):
that uh.
So I thought it was good tohave a standard so that we could
standardize the process andthen ultimately make that an
option for people in standardslike uh, AASHTO, t24 and ASTM,
(03:34):
c31, uh and c39 AS ASHTO r39 r39and R100.
So for those of you and C1856,which that's the UHPC standard.
So the idea is that this iskind of like.
This needs to get woven intothe fabric of all of these
(03:56):
standards, in my opinion, sothat it is a regular option.
So what I did is originally thiswas published as a provisional
standard in AASHTO.
In the provisional processes ithas to get renewed every two
years or voted on to go to afull standard.
Thankfully, there were some ofthe members of AASHTO and some
(04:22):
of the DOTs I believe Floridaand Texas helped out with this
more than most because they usethe UHPC materials at times and
they contributed to it.
So that's why I can't claimfull ownership of this standard.
So what makes an AASHTOstandard An AASHTO standard is
consensus from the DOT.
(04:42):
So those members helped out,made some really good revisions
that made my rough standard amuch better standard, as the
consensus process does.
And now what we have is thisfull standard that can be used
for accreditation purposes andreferenced by other standards.
So what I did at that point nowthat this is live, I'm trying to
(05:05):
lobby the other committees andsubcommittees to consider adding
it.
So reached out to the variousAASHTO technical subcommittees
and main committee and the ASTMsubcommittees and main committee
to get this added.
And one other standard that Ireally want to get this added to
is ASTM C1077, because rightnow it allows for capping use of
(05:32):
pad caps and that's it.
But sometimes if somebody isused to working with UHPC all
the time and they say I justwant to grind all the ends and
be done with it, they would havean option to do that for
certification purposes of theirtechnicians and for a required
test method to be included intheir scope of services.
(05:54):
So a lot there withaccreditation certification
standard use.
But I want to make people awarethat R119 is out there.
I know we have people overseasthat listen to this at times and
they may not know about thedevelopment of this.
So I hope you check thisstandard out.
(06:14):
It would be in the 2024standards volume for AASHTO
standards volume for AASHTO andit would also be available
anywhere you get standards likeASTM, Compass or IHS, they
should have that as well.
I know Compass does.
I don't know about IHS, but Iassume at this point they would
have it.
(06:34):
Anyway, that's my publicservice announcement slash
promotional message about R119.
Kim Swanson (06:42):
So is there a ASTM equivalent to this, or is it
just only an AASHTO standard?
Brian Johnson (06:47):
Of course you would ask that question.
No, there is not an ASTMequivalent to that.
The current agreement betweenASTM and AASHTO is that if there
is a new standard developed inone, the other standard
development organization willnot develop a the same standard
(07:07):
in the other one.
Uh, now, as an AASHTO employee,I probably should have taken it
to AASHTO first, but I didn't.
Uh, actually did talk to ASTMin a committee meeting, cause I
was in a committee meeting whenthis uh, before I fully
developed this thing, I said,hey, are you interested in this?
(07:28):
Because I think it would makesense to refer to this, and I
can't remember whichsubcommittee meeting I was in.
But there was no interest indeveloping such a standard in
ASTM.
So I then took it to AASHTO andthat subcommittee was
interested in that.
So that's where it resides.
(07:49):
So there was a discussion.
I think if both of them wereinterested, I probably would
have talked to both of theorganization's decision-making
people who can have a say in thestandard and say I think this
is good for both of them.
So it would be nice to have atruly joint standard that could
(08:11):
get balloted to both at the sametime and have that be like the
guinea pig for trying that kindof balloting, because I really
do.
When it comes to the jointstandards, it's never really
been a joint standard, even ifyou see AASHTO and ASDM on the
same one.
What would be truly a jointstandard would be one where the
(08:33):
memberships of both committeesare voting on the same changes
to the same standard and areapproving this exact same one,
but they don't really.
It doesn't work that way.
I hope that one day it will.
It would take a lot of effortand a lot of okay, I don't know
(08:55):
how to say this, but in a waythat people understand.
But sometimes there are theprocesses at the end of the line
will dictate what happens atthe beginning.
We call that the tail waggingthe dog in our country, but
(09:17):
there's probably a phrase forthat in other places as well.
But I think that one of thereasons why we we would struggle
to to do that is because themeetings are held at different
times.
So that's not a great reasonfrom a process perspective to
say like we can't.
We can't do this because ofthis arbitrarily at one point,
(09:45):
arbitrarily selected date formeeting, uh, for these, these
activities, uh.
But I think that is that is notthe only roadblock in this
process, but it would certainlybe one of them and so just I
want to recap, of making sure Iunderstand this is that the
(10:06):
ashto r119 right?
Kim Swanson (10:09):
is that the right?
Did I say that right?
Okay, r119 you're trying to getnow that it's a real, real live
standard, it's an officialstandard um, you're trying to
get that referenced in otherstandards applicable standards
of saying, instead of their own.
This is how you do it, justlike.
(10:29):
Do it like AASHTO R119.
Yeah, that's right.
Brian Johnson (10:36):
And that's kind of the way it goes for practices
they really only have value ifthey're used in standard test
methods and other standards aswell, and otherwise it just kind
of hangs out there as apractice that nobody's requiring
.
And uh, and I'm not saying theyhave to require it, um, but I
think it at the beginning, ifpeople aren't really sure about
(10:57):
it, they could at least have anote or something that says you
can also, or or you may,consider using this standard, uh
, for certain circumstances, youknow, whatever however, they
want to define it if they wantto go light at first, because
this, you know, these things cantake some time and and I'm not
(11:19):
saying the standard is perfect,I mean it's.
It's probably like no standardis perfect, so it it's going to
have revisions, but I think justgetting it out there and
getting more people using it isthe way to improve it.
So, uh, we want to make thathappen and and I hope people
will start checking it out.
Kim Swanson (11:38):
So how often will it be revised Like?
How often?
Like you said, no standardsperfect.
So how often will people belooking at this at AASHTO,
making sure that it is stillrelevant and useful?
Brian Johnson (11:52):
Well, because it's a full standard now it'll
go into the normal routine of ithas to be updated every so many
years and I should be able torattle that off, but I can't
remember.
If it's eight years, like inASTM, it's eight years, it might
be less in AASHTO it might besix, but I just can't remember
(12:13):
right now.
Kim Swanson (12:14):
But it could be sooner if someone found a need
and wanted to ballot changes.
Brian Johnson (12:18):
Oh yeah, as needed always applies in
standards, except well, in ASTMand AASHTO, at least, like some
standards, they don't want to doit too often because it's too
disruptive, like I would say.
Like R18 is a good example of astandard that you don't want to
update all the time becausethere are all these systems that
(12:39):
are kind of tied to how thatdocument is laid out.
So you don't want to constantlydisrupt people unless it's
important.
So we had some small changestake place, but the big ballot
is going to be coming out heresoon.
But again, standardsdevelopment can be a slow
process, so I don't, even ifeverything goes well with that
(13:03):
one, it'll be two years beforepeople see those changes in
reality.
Kim Swanson (13:07):
All right, and is AASHTO R119 available for the
AASHTO accreditation programs?
Can laboratories be accreditedfor that starting now or not?
Brian Johnson (13:17):
yet?
Yeah, it's available forinclusion in the AASHTO
accreditation program.
For inclusion in the AASHTOaccreditation program, all they
have to do is request to have itincluded in the CCRL inspection
and they can add it to theirprogram and start accrediting
for it.
And we can start accreditingfor it, but nobody's going to
want it until it's required orreferred to and some of the
(13:42):
other standards that they arerequired to be accredited for.
Kim Swanson (13:46):
That makes sense.
So anything else about this,because I feel like we are right
on the cusp of this being itsown episode.
We were going back and forth,so is there anything else that
you want to talk about this andthen we can wrap up this
discussion.
Brian Johnson (14:00):
I don't think there's anything else to throw
in here.
I mainly want just people to beaware of this standard.
We can make this a mini episode.
I think that probably is fine,because we've dragged this
conversation out longer than Ihad expected, which this happens
.
Kim Swanson (14:21):
It definitely does.
Brian Johnson (14:23):
I often will go on too long about something.
I hope I didn't, though I hopethat there was some useful
information here for people,even though I feel like I may
have gone on too long.
Kim Swanson (14:33):
Well, I hope we didn't go on too long and that
our listeners are stilllistening, but I did want to put
a plug in.
We are gearing up for the 2025AASHTO Resource Technical
Exchange, as at the time of thisrecording, it will be March
17th through the 20th inBellevue, washington, again in
2025.
(14:54):
So if you've never been to atechnical exchange or you may
hear us refer to it as TechX ifyou've never attended, this is a
great opportunity for you toget involved and expand your
network and really exploretopics that really help you
improve your professional life.
Brian Johnson (15:17):
I'm going to say I'm going to say that's a thing
I would agree.
(15:37):
I would agree, I would agree, Iwould agree.
I think one of the advantagesof technical exchange is all the
people thatcontractors that youend up using for testing.
All sorts of opportunitiesawait when you attend TechX.
Kim Swanson (15:56):
Yes, and you can find out more information about
resourceorg TechEx ataashtoresource.
org/ events.
Well, thanks for taking time todiscuss AASHTO R119 today,
Brian.
Brian Johnson (16:10):
I am very happy to do it.
As I said, I wanted to get theword out about this standard, so
hopefully we were successful.
Kim Swanson (16:19):
And if you have questions about the standard,
you can reach out to Brian orcatch him at TechX, because I'm
sure he will be there.
Brian Johnson (16:27):
I will be there and I'm also going to be on the
mid-year meetings for the compmeetings, talking about this at
the relevant ones, and I'm goingto be at the ASTM meeting in
December in Orlando also pushingthis standard.
And I guess I should mention Iam pushing this standard but not
because I I don't like, standto gain anything by this, other
(16:52):
than the fact that I think itwould be really useful for
people uh, to have it, and otherthan this recording, and people
who have worked on this with methey'll have no idea that I had
anything to do with it, andthat's totally fine.
I almost didn't even mention myinvolvement in it, but you
might be wondering, like, why Icare so much about it is because
I put a lot of effort into it.
(17:13):
Anyway, that's my soft salespitch, I guess, on that, I'm not
, there's a reason Was it soft?
Well, there's a reason that I'mnot in business.
I would be a horrible businessperson.
Kim Swanson (17:28):
I'm going to not comment on that, but thanks for
joining us and see you next time.
Brian Johnson (17:37):
All right.
Kim Swanson (17:41):
Sounds good.
Thanks for listening to AASHTOResource Q&A.
If you'd like to be a guest orjust submit a question, send us
an email at podcast ataashtoresourceorg, or call Brian
at 240-436-4820.
For other news and relatedcontent, check out AASHTO
Resources social media accountsor go to aashtoresourceorg.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.